Share

States Rush to Dump Touchscreen Voting Systems

by: Julian Sanchez  |  Ars Technica

photo
Workers at a voting site in Cleveland try to get an electronic voting machine to start on Election Day. States are scrapping tens of thousands of pricey touchscreen systems in response to mounting concerns about the machines' reliability. (Photo: Amy Sancetta / AP)

    It's a good time to pick up an electronic voting machine on the cheap - provided you're not a stickler for things like "accuracy" or "security." States are scrapping tens of thousands of pricey touchscreen systems in response to mounting concerns about the machines' reliability.

    After the butterfly ballot debacle of the 2000 presidential election, in which scores of elderly Floridians revealed a surprising fondness for Pat Buchanan, electronic voting was touted as the way to avoid any such fiasco in the future. Congress passed the Help America Vote Act of 2002, which allocated some $3 billion in federal grants to help states upgrade their voting equipment - $2 billion of which had been spent by the end of 2007.

    Now, however, many of those states - including Alaska, California, Florida, Iowa, Maryland, Tennessee, and New Mexico - are ditching touchscreen kiosks with price tags as high as $5,000 each in favor of paper ballots. Ohio seems likely to follow suit once a legal battle with Premier Election Services, a voting machine manufacturer, is resolved. Though many of the transitions from touchscreen to paper are slated to take years to complete, already the proportion of voters served by touchscreens is expected to fall to 36 percent in November, down from a high of 44 percent in 2006. More voters are expected to use paper ballots in 2008 than did back in 2000.

    Critics - including some of us at Ars - had long warned that electronic voting systems were not ready for prime time, citing concerns about their lack of transparency, vulnerability to tampering, and plain bugginess. Finally, states are increasingly coming to the same conclusion. Last year, Ohio produced a 1,000-page report cataloging a host of problems with the state's voting machines. Since then, a glitch blamed on conflicts with anti-virus software initially caused hundred of votes to be dropped as they were uploaded to tallying servers. A "top-to-bottom" review of California's voting systems last year found that hacker "red teams" were able to easily compromise machines made by Premier, Sequoia, Hart Intercivic, and Election Systems & Software - leading the state to decertify the machines.

    In Florida, officials had hurried to upgrade voting technology after the embarrassment of 2000, spending tens of millions on new touchscreen kiosks - machines several counties are still paying off. Last year, in the wake of innumerable snafus, Gov. Charlie Crist announced the state would be scrapping more than 25,000 touchscreen machines. The bill for the transition back to paper could run as high as $35 million more. Perhaps just to rub salt into the wound, Sequoia offered to buy back the $5,000 boxes for $1 each. The state declined, passing the machines along to a recycling firm that will seek to resell the machines or strip them for parts.

    Of course, finding a buyer for thousands of bulky machines that have been judged buggy and insecure may not be so easy. AP reports that some states have resorted to peddling the devices on sites like eBay or Craigslist, while others are hoping to unload them on developing nations.

  

»


Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

and now diebold/premier

and now diebold/premier election solutions has admitted there are flaws with their own product. lol! http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VOTING_MACHINES?SITE=CAGRA&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Ridiculous! Diebold knew

Ridiculous! Diebold knew their machines were faulty from the beginning. If engineers at Johns Hopkins knew in 2000 that their machines were faulty; Diebold knew. As a then Diebold stockholder, I couldn't even take the gain but gave my shares to a charity. Too bad they did not stick to the automatic teller machines instead of becoming part of the worst phase of our democracy's history.

It's about time they dump

It's about time they dump those voting machines, as they were told in 2006 they were controlled by Diebold and the memory chips could be changed in transet. Stephen Spoonamore told the world in 2006 they were junk and Rove had control in Ohio in 2004. go watch the video about it by Spoonamore. http://www.velvetrevolution.us it has all the info on it.

Wondering whether any of the

Wondering whether any of the states are planning on suing re. this. Or have the companies making these machines been rendered immune, as have the pharmaceutical companies?????

Don't go celebrating yet,

Don't go celebrating yet, because the software used to count votes in each county is still the same easily hacked software we election nuts have warning you all about.

I went to my bank today, a

I went to my bank today, a local branch of a major national bank. I used its ATM with total confidence, even when I spotted the fact that this machine was manufactured by Diebold. Isn't it amazing that Diebold ATMs are so precise, secure, and reliable, complete with paper readout, while their voting machines are so hackable, unreliable, and totally lacking in verifiable paper records?

I live in the firmly

I live in the firmly Republican Right state of South Carolina and it is my guess, given the party in power here could really care less about things like this, that we will be a prime buyer of these discounted touch screen machines that are already compromised to drop votes. ---- Heck, out politicians know who they want to win so why even bother with a fair election. --- Ya think?

I've been bugging the editor

I've been bugging the editor of the local (Gannett) paper here to do a series of articles on voting in our state and some of the issues about these machines, rigged votes, etc. that have been in the media for many months. NOPE. They would much rather write editorials on the fact that a local high school football team was punished for allowing contract drills a few days too early and those kinds of serious things. ---- Needless to say, this paper is not too left-leaning and it makes the term "Liberal Media" look like an oxymoron. There seems to be little interest from the right as to things like habeus corpus or voter rights or the rights of alternative lifestyle folks to have the same rights as Christians (even though many of them are). --- It will be interesting to see if there is any outrage from the moderates about such a thing. After all, isn't the right to Vote and the right to have your vote actually count equally the basis of a democracy?

Red states invariably

Red states invariably possess a voting apparatus which includes voting machines with no paper trail. In my view, that's the main reason some of them are red states instead of blue states. Public officials along with the PTB can use the machines as a resource to choose the candidates most in agreement with their views. Therefore, in the red states, the disenfranchisement of the voter, through programming in, and manipulating voting results, seems to be much more clear and profound than in states that now require a paper trail and audit system. Additionally, many Republicans have brought us the war, the threat of WWIII, the sullying of America's international image, 911, high gas prices, high food prices, high prices in general, and the near total collapse of the economy. Knowing this, red state Americans appear to be poised to vote for McCain. Why would these Americans, in apparent droves in primarily Southern states, cast votes against their own interests?